Page 49
CHAP. IV. The Question stated; It is proved, that it is not Law∣ful to Act contrary to the Opinion of a Mans parti∣cular Conscience, by five Arguments; because the particular Conscience is the Proximate Rule of Acti∣on, granted by all Divines. Because of that Text, Rom. 14.23. Because it Subjects a Man to conti∣nual Terrors of Conscience. The contrary Principle over-throws the Natural Order of the Souls Operati∣on, and plucks up a great Pillar of the Protestant Religion, and would make the Scriptures and Ar∣gumentative Books of little Ʋse but to Torment Men.
§. 1. WE come now to assert our Proposition, That it is not Lawful for any Person to act against an Opining Conscience, i. e. (as we have largely opened). That, supposing a Person, though he hath not demonstrative Ar∣guments, to prove this or that unlawful, which he is required to do: Yet if he hath formed up a particular Judgment of Conscience, from Arguments, which seem to him very pro∣bable, so as he cannot Answer them, nor rest satisfied in the Answers of others, while he so judgeth, it is sin and wicked∣ness in him, especially in Matters which concern the Wor∣ship of God, to do that Action, however required of him. This we shall make good by several Arguments.
§. 2.1. To swerve from what God hath made the Proxi∣mate Rule of our actions, is sinful. But to act contrary to the Opi∣nion of our own Consciences, is to swerve from what God bath made the Proximate Rule of our Actions — Therefore it is sinful. The Major can with no Modesty be denyed; for, what is sin, but a Transgression of, or deviation from the Rule of